2 ms·
Yes I actually did some more research and it seems that even in the case of Chernobyl this is not a concern in the long run. In that Plutonium is not a concern
by devoply 8y ago
Yes I actually did some more research and it seems that even in the case of Chernobyl this is not a concern in the long run. In that Plutonium is not a concern in general which has a half-life of up to 300,000 years. And most other elements decay after a few decades. So in the case of nuclear meltdowns the concerns are limited to the century in which they happen mostly.
https://www.greenfacts.org/en/chernobyl/l-3/3-chernobyl-environment.htm#2p0 https://www.greenfacts.org/en/chernobyl/l-3/3-chernobyl-envi...
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/radwaste.html https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/r...
I still think the issue exists with other contaminants but with at least nuclear energy it seems the long term effects of its use in terms of disasters and even spent fuel are very limited.
- petre 8y agoExcept Pu is toxic and accumulates in the bone marrow, compared to Cs which is excreted. Unit 3 at Fukushima was the only one fueled with MOX fuel containing 6% Pu.